Eco-activists coat private jet with yellow spray in Ibiza
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may be quoting the law, but I'm sure you know that this does not reflect reality, since you appear to be closely involved. I am not an accountant but I read that the aircraft on Sylt is "owned" by an Austrian company, although it is recognised that the real owner is a real-estate developer from Grevenbroich. Presumably all use is invoiced by the Austrian company to the German company: no fuel tax is paid because it's a "commercial" operation and the invoices are calculated so that the Austrian company makes no/minimal profits and pays no taxes on revenue in Austria and the German operation can offset its flight lcosts against taxes in the BRD.
Please - Boabity and his dudeness - don't give us half a story to fool us when you are certainly aware of all the story.
Please - Boabity and his dudeness - don't give us half a story to fool us when you are certainly aware of all the story.
What I do know is that any private clients that I’ve worked for or any non commercial ops that I do have paid fuel duty/tax and we always had to check that it was billed as private. I believe quite strongly that the rules of the taxation are enforced fairly strictly and carry hefty fines if you get it wrong.
running an AOC is an expensive and very difficult way to avoid paying tax on fuelling. If the aircraft is owned by the organisation that is using it, you need to pay tax.
Doubtless there are loopholes but they’re clearly not easy and not worth it otherwise I’d have seen people operating like that.
As for cyclical temperature patterns, nah definitely not. The cycles have been until this recent one over thousands of years, this much larger one is directly connected with the Industrial Revolution which has generated a disproportionate spike. It’s genuinely an undisputable fact that we are responsible for it. The planet will be absolutely fine of course, once we have killed ourselves with it.
Something needs to change to avoid our inevitable demise but the change can only be one of technology.
(IMHO)
The fact is - the world over time goes through cycles of warming and cooling and it just happens that at this moment in time we are the ones that are experiencing a 'warmer' period (have to take a moment here to give credit how weather charts used for television weather reports now use much more lurid colours and descriptors for hot weather to try and alarm the populous).
It's nothing new although the fact we as a developed species have access to the technology to spread this information globally means it is given awareness anywhere and everywhere. This has no more about the human interaction with global climatology than the opportunity for governments and bodies globally to use it to introduce new taxes and raise prices for producing various commodities. Its also amazing how these "eco protestors" also are wearing man made fibres and materials (oil required to produce) as one small example and to travel to places (and I will guess not by walking) to make their weak-assed points. 'Just Stop Oil' for one example needs a severe wake-up call, absolute dim-witted moronic people - and they also need protecting from themselves as very shortly I can see them getting hurt by the ever more frustrated public in the U.K. - and no-one wants to see that despite being such a hated group.
The fact is - the world over time goes through cycles of warming and cooling and it just happens that at this moment in time we are the ones that are experiencing a 'warmer' period (have to take a moment here to give credit how weather charts used for television weather reports now use much more lurid colours and descriptors for hot weather to try and alarm the populous).
It's nothing new although the fact we as a developed species have access to the technology to spread this information globally means it is given awareness anywhere and everywhere. This has no more about the human interaction with global climatology than the opportunity for governments and bodies globally to use it to introduce new taxes and raise prices for producing various commodities. Its also amazing how these "eco protestors" also are wearing man made fibres and materials (oil required to produce) as one small example and to travel to places (and I will guess not by walking) to make their weak-assed points. 'Just Stop Oil' for one example needs a severe wake-up call, absolute dim-witted moronic people - and they also need protecting from themselves as very shortly I can see them getting hurt by the ever more frustrated public in the U.K. - and no-one wants to see that despite being such a hated group.
FACT: Atmospheric CO2 has reached approx 423ppm in 2023 and is rising steeply.
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/mlo.html
FACT: The long run graph for atmospheric CO2 indicates that the last time atmospheric CO2 was over 400ppm was several million years ago.
https://earth.org/data_visualization...istory-of-co2/
FACT: Modern humans have evolved during a period when atmospheric CO2 has been in relatively stable oscillations around 200-250ppm, barring the very immediate past when we have forced it above 400ppm due to fossil fuel emissions (etc)
https://royalsociety.org/topics-poli...es/question-7/
FACT : If you go back to the last time atmospheric CO2 was over 400ppm the temperature on earth was several degrees C higher. At that time temperature was falling as CO2 was declining. The difference is that this time the planet is climbing the slope in the reverse direction.
If the planet is to 'just' stop there then perhaps things might be survivable for mammals of the size of humans. Back then was the Tortonian age (more specifically, the Vallesian age). Back then the common ancestor of humans and chimps was probably a part-tree-dwelling quadruped primate, so it was doable in a fashion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallesian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortonian
However there are two further issues. One is the rate of change which is incredibly fast, probably only exceeded by asteroid impacts and comparable to the long-run supervolcano stuff. The second is the likelihood of it not stopping there, due to the system lags, and flipping to a full-on greenhouse earth. In any case (FACT) this also brings a sea level rise of 60m which is what one expects when most of the polar ice caps vanish, which tends to wipe out about 80-90% of humans and their corresponding crop/etc habitats as the species predominantly dwells in the littoral. It is not clear how fast an Antarctic (and Greenland) ice cap collapse can occur as it has never really been tried before, but we seem to be baking-in a go at that experiment on the current trajectory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth103/node/733
it really is not clear how fast an Antarctic break up event might happen - but even (only) a 5m rise from the west Antarctic shelf would have seious repercussions and could come in my lifetime in some rapid collapse scenarios
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/im...sea-level-rise
FACT: Those 60,000 excess deaths in Europe alone last year are likely only the fore-runner of what is coming.
"As the planet has heated, hotter-than-usual spells have become more intense and now last on average about 24 hours longer than 60 years ago, according to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Noaa data from the 50 most populous cities in the US shows the heatwave season is 49 days longer now compared with the 1960s. The effects of heat on health are cumulative, and the body only starts to recover when the temperature drops below 27C (80F). Even small temperature rises can result in increased deaths and illness.“Extreme heat is killer heat, and multiple-day heatwaves – and early-season ones – are the biggest threat, because people can’t get a break and the body can only sustain it for so long,” said Brenda Ekwurzel, the director of climate science for the climate and energy programme at the Union of Concerned Scientists in the US. “These are not isolated heat events; this is what the turbo-charged climate change world looks like.” In Phoenix, Arizona, the National Weather Service has issued a “very dangerous long-duration heat” alert for the second consecutive week, with daily temperatures expected to fluctuate between 29C (85F) and 47C (118F). Temperatures in Europe are about 10-15C hotter than usual, and the heatwave is lasting a long time, as an established high-pressure system across the region is causing temperatures to climb every day. Clouds of Saharan dust are also making conditions worse."
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...nge-scientists
I think that the various highly intelligent and well organised activist groups have a far bleaker picture of the future for aviation than I suggest. In my opinion you may need a lot of strength.
Last edited by petit plateau; 18th Jul 2023 at 10:30.
Not per capita, not if you add historic pollution over the age of the industrialisation etc. That is exactly what I mean, you can always find an excuse.
I would argue the question can't be about the relative emissions to total emissions, but must look at the possible alternatives. Is it justified to emit ten times more to enjoy a beach break a few hours quicker just because I can afford it?
I can't help but to agree with the protesters, I think they have a point. It's not only morally wrong that rich people behave this way, it also poisons the society and the debate. Again, the next guy will say, hey, my trip to Bali on Virgin used only a tenth of what a private jet would have used!
And if you remove from all those countries that have a large if not the majority of the population that cannot afford a light bulb let alone a car, then the per capita becomes significantly different.
If something that is adverse to society is exposed in a way that people who had merely accepted it start to consider what the actual costs are even 3% is a lot.
---
I know it would suck for me to spend 0.0004% of my income to have some paint cleaned from my airplane. There is probably insurance coverage for vandalism of that magnitude.
---
I doubt any of us will live to see how bad it gets - how the wars will start between nuclear weapon bearing nations over shifts in water and arable land. What will be the first year a billion people die of thirst, heat, or starvation, or drowning as the shift in rainfall produces short term massive flooding in areas of previously infrequent rainfall - numbers so great the bodies are left on the open ground or choking rivers as the rest flee for survival. Against that ever more likely scenario a splash of paint and a little glue seems a trifling matter.
There's the punchline to a joke that could be repurposed - "If you say so Sir, but this is a lighthouse."
We were told 30 years ago,
"“The world is shifting towards a superheated climate not seen in the past 1m years, prior to human existence, because “we are damned fools” for not acting upon warnings over the climate crisis, according to James Hansen, the US scientist who alerted the world to the greenhouse effect in the 1980s. .........We quite possibly are already living in a climate that no human has lived through before and we are certainly living in a climate that no human has lived in since before the birth of agriculture,” said Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University. Should global temperatures rise by a further 1C or more, which is widely predicted to happen by the end of the century barring a drastic reduction in emissions, Huber said Hansen was “broadly correct” that the world will be plunged into the sort of warmth not seen since 1-3m years ago, a period of time called the Pliocene. “That is a radically different world,” said Huber of an epoch in which it was warm enough for beech trees to grow near the south pole and sea levels were about 20 meters higher than now, which would today drown most coastal cities."
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...entist-warning
and it may be accelerating
"Under the current geopolitical approach to GHG emissions, global warming will likely 20 pierce the 1.5°C ceiling in the 2020s and 2°C before 2050. Impacts on people and nature will accelerate as global warming pumps up hydrologic extremes. The enormity of consequences demands a return to Holocene-level global temperature. Required actions ....... will not happen with the current geopolitical approach, but current political crises present an opportunity for reset, especially if young people can grasp their situation."
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/Docume...2023.07.05.pdf
Brenda gets it
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ecord-breaking
"“The world is shifting towards a superheated climate not seen in the past 1m years, prior to human existence, because “we are damned fools” for not acting upon warnings over the climate crisis, according to James Hansen, the US scientist who alerted the world to the greenhouse effect in the 1980s. .........We quite possibly are already living in a climate that no human has lived through before and we are certainly living in a climate that no human has lived in since before the birth of agriculture,” said Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University. Should global temperatures rise by a further 1C or more, which is widely predicted to happen by the end of the century barring a drastic reduction in emissions, Huber said Hansen was “broadly correct” that the world will be plunged into the sort of warmth not seen since 1-3m years ago, a period of time called the Pliocene. “That is a radically different world,” said Huber of an epoch in which it was warm enough for beech trees to grow near the south pole and sea levels were about 20 meters higher than now, which would today drown most coastal cities."
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...entist-warning
and it may be accelerating
"Under the current geopolitical approach to GHG emissions, global warming will likely 20 pierce the 1.5°C ceiling in the 2020s and 2°C before 2050. Impacts on people and nature will accelerate as global warming pumps up hydrologic extremes. The enormity of consequences demands a return to Holocene-level global temperature. Required actions ....... will not happen with the current geopolitical approach, but current political crises present an opportunity for reset, especially if young people can grasp their situation."
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/Docume...2023.07.05.pdf
Brenda gets it
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ecord-breaking
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please - Boabity and his dudeness - don't give us half a story to fool us when you are certainly aware of all the story.
"We" - the company I fly for - pay mineral oil tax and can´t reclaim it. "Our" aircraft is not on an AOC, thus private and its owned an operated by "us". We are an NCC operator.
Now clear enough for you ?
A different view.
Researchers show new Ice Age may begin by 2030
https://phys.org/news/2015-07-ice-age.html
Researchers show new Ice Age may begin by 2030
https://phys.org/news/2015-07-ice-age.html
That 2015 paper? 8 years and no updates? I see at least two papers on solar cycles and magnetic fields by Prof. V. Zharkova have been retracted.
I don´t know what the f you are talking about. You asked about taxation of aviation fuel in Germany and I answered. Whether the now orange CJ is on an AOC or not I do not know nor did I ever claim I did.
"We" - the company I fly for - pay mineral oil tax and can´t reclaim it. "Our" aircraft is not on an AOC, thus private and its owned an operated by "us". We are an NCC operator.
Now clear enough for you ?
"We" - the company I fly for - pay mineral oil tax and can´t reclaim it. "Our" aircraft is not on an AOC, thus private and its owned an operated by "us". We are an NCC operator.
Now clear enough for you ?
It does not matter, Mister Fartilet. Mister Dudeness told you in no uncertain terms that he only worked for companies that did the taxation the right way. If you fly private, you pay tax on fuel. If you fly commercial, you don't. What others do is not his business. Stop being a bully, your posts are really unpleasant to read.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You clearly have no clue so when people who DO have a clue tell you something, perhaps consider their advice expert and move on?
Or you can choose to ignore it and be a troll, which is certainly what you appear to be, a hippo can only be a hippo after all.
A few decades ago, aircraft hijacks were all the rage. Come aboard and pull a gun, get to read out your manifesto to the baited media, and get a free flight to somewhere.
How was the problem solved? With 'extreme prejudice'. Two can play the game, and the other side got serious. Real serious. With munitions. Shoot first and ask questions later.
You don't hear about hijackings much any more. The activist grew up, found more profitable ventures such as becoming priests, bankers, politicians, and lawyers. Flying bizjets.
Another 'hair raising' stunt, this time in Germany, and the people inconvenienced took matters into their own hands. That blonde lady has a particular twist on how to do things!
Do they do stunts like this in America? Would that be as a result of inconvenienced citizens carrying guns and not afraid to use them to 'defend their own constitutional rights' or is it because climate change is not an overwhelming issue there? Maybe they don't have enough eco-orange paint to go around? Just wondering....
How was the problem solved? With 'extreme prejudice'. Two can play the game, and the other side got serious. Real serious. With munitions. Shoot first and ask questions later.
You don't hear about hijackings much any more. The activist grew up, found more profitable ventures such as becoming priests, bankers, politicians, and lawyers. Flying bizjets.
Another 'hair raising' stunt, this time in Germany, and the people inconvenienced took matters into their own hands. That blonde lady has a particular twist on how to do things!
Do they do stunts like this in America? Would that be as a result of inconvenienced citizens carrying guns and not afraid to use them to 'defend their own constitutional rights' or is it because climate change is not an overwhelming issue there? Maybe they don't have enough eco-orange paint to go around? Just wondering....
Last edited by Thirsty; 22nd Jul 2023 at 14:00.
A few decades ago, aircraft hijacks were all the rage. Come aboard and pull a gun, get to read out your manifesto to the baited media, and get a free flight to somewhere.
How was the problem solved? With 'extreme prejudice'. Two can play the game, and the other side got serious. Real serious. With munitions. Shoot first and ask questions later.
You don't hear about hijackings much any more. The activist grew up, found more profitable ventures such as becoming priests, bankers, politicians, and lawyers. Flying bizjets.
Another 'hair raising' stunt, this time in Germany, and the people inconvenienced took matters into their own hands. That blonde lady has a particular twist on how to do things!
https://twitter.com/TaraBull808/stat...6268906098689?
Do they do stunts like this in America? Would that be as a result of inconvenienced citizens carrying guns and not afraid to use them to 'defend their own constitutional rights' or is it because climate change is not an overwhelming issue there? Maybe they don't have enough eco-orange paint to go around? Just wondering....
How was the problem solved? With 'extreme prejudice'. Two can play the game, and the other side got serious. Real serious. With munitions. Shoot first and ask questions later.
You don't hear about hijackings much any more. The activist grew up, found more profitable ventures such as becoming priests, bankers, politicians, and lawyers. Flying bizjets.
Another 'hair raising' stunt, this time in Germany, and the people inconvenienced took matters into their own hands. That blonde lady has a particular twist on how to do things!
https://twitter.com/TaraBull808/stat...6268906098689?
Do they do stunts like this in America? Would that be as a result of inconvenienced citizens carrying guns and not afraid to use them to 'defend their own constitutional rights' or is it because climate change is not an overwhelming issue there? Maybe they don't have enough eco-orange paint to go around? Just wondering....
When guns and other weapons are brought into the equation, then usage cannot be assumed to be restricted to one group only.
The stunt as you call it, is being performed by all users of fossil fuels, who are fairly directly responsible for the consequences
"Many people who spend most of their time outside, such as farmers, builders and the homeless, die outright from heatstroke. But far more lives are claimed by heart, lung and kidney disease made worse in hot weather. Research pegs the death toll from heat in Europe last summer at 61,672 people – more than a jumbo jet crashing out of the sky every day [in Europe alone]."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...s-hot-extremes
I'm sure the peaceful civil disobedience protesters in Germany were quite within their rights to protest. That they did it in front of vehicles going about their day-to-day business, and the drivers, quite understandably, were most exceeding peeved. The video of the hair pulling shows there a consequences from decisions, and as I pointed out, having a sore scalp in Germany for a day or two may be far less of a problem than finding your comrade in a morgue in the USA. Conspiracy theorists would say the blonde woman was an anti-demonstrator plant to embarrass the protesters. Certainly the video taken looked to be a well planned location to capture all the action, which is sometimes staged for maximum outrage. What I question is their choice of protest. Should they use a more appropriate forum where people who can more likely facilitate change are targeted, rather than innocent civilians ignorantly going about their daily activities? Education rather than shoving your face into my space may be a more effective approach.
The Guardian article you reference speaks about people that are already at risk (it talks about older people and women), and cites the elevated risk as 60%, just ten percent above equal probabilities. This ignores a significant portion of the population (children, youth, middle aged, and males) and alienates the readers. The example cited, 86 years old Maria already is living alone with no air-conditioning (thus probably sacrificing her life and saving the world from total destruction), and on diabetes and heart medication every day. How contributory was climate change to her condition? Probably not a strong case to build your valid argument on, as she may have expired, hot weather or not.
Annoying possible supporters aggressively by blocking traffic, vandalising bizjets, etc is probably not the most wisest way of changing the world. It doesn't do their cause any good. Not all publicity is good publicity, regardless of what Hollywood movie stars tell you. The world is a little more complicated than that. Don't be a climate bully. Forced instant change can have unforseen unrelated consequences. Just saying....
The Guardian article you reference speaks about people that are already at risk (it talks about older people and women), and cites the elevated risk as 60%, just ten percent above equal probabilities. This ignores a significant portion of the population (children, youth, middle aged, and males) and alienates the readers. The example cited, 86 years old Maria already is living alone with no air-conditioning (thus probably sacrificing her life and saving the world from total destruction), and on diabetes and heart medication every day. How contributory was climate change to her condition? Probably not a strong case to build your valid argument on, as she may have expired, hot weather or not.
Annoying possible supporters aggressively by blocking traffic, vandalising bizjets, etc is probably not the most wisest way of changing the world. It doesn't do their cause any good. Not all publicity is good publicity, regardless of what Hollywood movie stars tell you. The world is a little more complicated than that. Don't be a climate bully. Forced instant change can have unforseen unrelated consequences. Just saying....
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
99% ???
a little research will demonstrate that a fast decreasing % are being used for indispensable corporate use. Just consider that the most populous private jet routes are now to leisure destinations. Also some of the biggest emitters travel on large aircraft with very few passengers.
and do we really think that oligarchs use is justifiable indispensable corporate use? RA does not need a 787.
Rhodes and Corfu are burning tonight; 48C temps in many Med resorts; Canadian wildfires continue into their 2nd month, but let’s do nothing and just talk whataboutery.
a little research will demonstrate that a fast decreasing % are being used for indispensable corporate use. Just consider that the most populous private jet routes are now to leisure destinations. Also some of the biggest emitters travel on large aircraft with very few passengers.
and do we really think that oligarchs use is justifiable indispensable corporate use? RA does not need a 787.
Rhodes and Corfu are burning tonight; 48C temps in many Med resorts; Canadian wildfires continue into their 2nd month, but let’s do nothing and just talk whataboutery.
That’s nonsense.
99% of the business jets, are tools to safe time for the owners and Indispensable to run a multi million business, that is paying a lot of taxes and creates millions of jobs.
These aircraft are no toys, but business tool.
even the term private jet is wrong and it is often used by envious people and communists to let them view bad in the eyes of the public.
99% of the business jets, are tools to safe time for the owners and Indispensable to run a multi million business, that is paying a lot of taxes and creates millions of jobs.
These aircraft are no toys, but business tool.
even the term private jet is wrong and it is often used by envious people and communists to let them view bad in the eyes of the public.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Popular “business” destinations include Geneva, Nice, Mykonos, Palma, Ibiza, Limassol, St.Moritz, Las Vegas, Fort Lauderdale, Aspen, and of course wherever the Superbowl is each year.
99% ???
a little research will demonstrate that a fast decreasing % are being used for indispensable corporate use. Just consider that the most populous private jet routes are now to leisure destinations. Also some of the biggest emitters travel on large aircraft with very few passengers.
and do we really think that oligarchs use is justifiable indispensable corporate use? RA does not need a 787.
Rhodes and Corfu are burning tonight; 48C temps in many Med resorts; Canadian wildfires continue into their 2nd month, but let’s do nothing and just talk whataboutery.
a little research will demonstrate that a fast decreasing % are being used for indispensable corporate use. Just consider that the most populous private jet routes are now to leisure destinations. Also some of the biggest emitters travel on large aircraft with very few passengers.
and do we really think that oligarchs use is justifiable indispensable corporate use? RA does not need a 787.
Rhodes and Corfu are burning tonight; 48C temps in many Med resorts; Canadian wildfires continue into their 2nd month, but let’s do nothing and just talk whataboutery.
It won't!
Right idea, wrong target.
How will nudging a pebble start an avalanche? How will sitting at a lunch counter or in a bus seat make a change in US civil rights? How could nailing a carpenter to a cross in the Middle East change European politics 2000 years later. This is the sort of time scale required to back civilization off the carbon cliff, the sooner started the better. It won't be started by us old guys who won't live to see the tragedy - it will be started by those who still have 60 to 80 years to suffer from what the last 100 years has done. They don't have money, political power, lobbyists. They do have spray paint. Be happy they are using that.